We are a grass roots organization located in both Israel and the United States. Our intention is to be pro-active on behalf of Israel. This means we will identify the topics that need examination, analysis and promotion. Our intention is to write accurately what is going on here in Israel rather than react to the anti-Israel media pieces that comprise most of today's media outlets.

Thursday, May 23, 2013

The Skeptic’s Curse

Ahmed
Jadallah/ReutersOn Oct. 6, 2000, Palestinian boys in the Gaza strip
walked past graffiti representing Muhammad al-Dura as he was shown in a
television report.

TEL AVIV — In late September 2000, at the beginning of the second Palestinian intifada, the French TV station France 2 aired some 60 seconds of footage allegedly showing the killing of a Palestinian boy in the Gaza Strip.

Muhammad al-Dura, who was 12 at the time, and his father are shown
caught in an exchange of fire between Israeli soldiers and Palestinian
fighters. The boy cowers behind his father, with what sounds like
gunshots crackling in the background. Smoke then blocks our view. When
it lifts the boy is flattened, listless, and his father is lying against
the wall, apparently in serious physical distress. The footage soon
became one of the most memorable and heart-wrenching of the bloody
Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
No one knows what happened exactly at the Netzarim Junction that day.
The French broadcast claimed that gunfire from Israeli soldiers killed
the boy. That version of the facts immediately became the official
Palestinian account. Israel did not accept responsibility, nor did it
deny being involved. And so the French-Palestinian narrative stuck.

But this Sunday, the Israeli Ministry of Strategic Affairs released a report undermining
that account. The document concludes there is “strong evidence” that
Muhammad and his father “were not hit by bullets at all in the scenes
filmed.” It also details many errors, omissions and open questions in
the widely accepted narrative of the event.
I first heard that there might be a problem with the al-Dura story
soon after the incident. I was the head of the news division at Haaretz at
the time, and a young reporter approached me to say that a high-ranking
official at the Israel Defense Force would be staging, in front of a
crew from “60 Minutes,” a re-enactment of the shooting to prove the
French and Palestinian chroniclers wrong.

I believed the initial story about al-Dura, and I was highly suspicious of the motivations of anyone attempting to disprove it.

Note a few things here. “I believed the initial story about
al-Durah.” This readiness to believe the worst of the Israeli army –
that they’d target a father and child and rain down bullets upon them,
was pervasive, particularly among the journalists who were most proud of
their self-critical attitude. As Bet Michael said to me in November of 2003 (after I had studied with Shahaf and seen the France2 raw footage with Enderlin),

BM: 100%. The israelis killed the boy.

RL: Really? Are you aware of the investigation and its findings?

BM: The investigator was a nut… some engineer with the army who argued a conspiracy theory that he kid committed suicide.

RL: Suicide?

MS: (to me while BM waxed eloquent to

NB) He’s being sarcastic.

RL: Were you being sarcastic?

BM: Not at all. I meant every word.

RL: Suicide?

BM: Oh, that was sarcastic, but since then the IDF has killed over 200 palestinian children, you can check with B’tselem.

Here’s a close-up view of the world of aggressive lethal journalism,
backed by their “researchers” who systematically compile the lethal
narratives. At the time I did not realize it, but I should have after
Jenin in 2002, that the lethal journalists – in the case of many, probably not even knowingly – were now dominant in the journalistic scene in Israel.

The reporter and I both thought the military was crazy to do such a thing; it would look like an exercise in white-washing.

Another major theme. When I reported my research to a dear friend
from the 1990s (who was on the board of B’tselem), his immediate
response was, “You’re whitewashing the occupation.” Or to another friend
who, finally giving into the evidence, responded, “It was still our
fault. If there hadn’t been a settlement there this wouldn’t have
happened.” Somehow it was our fault that they faked it and we’re getting
demonized with it. More insight into masochistic omnipotence syndrome.

Her story ran
on Nov.7, 2000, with a headline calling the probe “dubious.” To some,
the piece seemed to portray one of the men behind the investigation, the
physicist Nahum Shahaf, as eccentric, even weird. According to one critic, we “attacked him ferociously.”

If the history of “hit-jobs” in the media is done, the early 21st
century will have a special place for the kind of aggressiveness with
which the media themselves took the initiative (rather than taking
direction from political interests) against people they didn’t like. The
“conspiracy theory” that Charles derided became canonical at the hands
of Anat Cygielman, who derided the whole affair.
If one thinks of this affair as a form of the emperor’s new clothes –
except, here, the procession of an icon of hatred, rather than a silly
naked emperor – then the court that falls in line is the journalists.
Interesting to know the social framework in which this happened.

I plead guilty: I believed the initial story about
al-Dura, and I was highly suspicious of the motivations of anyone
attempting to disprove it.

This is pretty amazing courage in our day and age, and even more in this affair. As Anne-Elisabeth Moutet comments about the French scene (in the context of which one should understand a fair amount of Charles Enderlin’s behavior):

To understand the al-Dura affair, it helps to keep one
thing in mind: In France, you can’t own up to a mistake. This is a
country where the law of the Circus Maximus still applies: Vae victis,
Woe to the vanquished. Slip, and it’s thumbs-down. Not for nothing was
Brennus a Gaul. His modern French heirs don’t do apologies well, or at
all if they can possibly help it. Why should they? That would be an
admission of weakness. Blink, and you become the fall guy.

In my delineation of the characteristics of lethal journalism
Middle-East style (Al Durah Journalism), I call this honor-shame
journalism because the operative mechanism is, prefer public honor and
private guilt to private integrity and public shame.

In this instance Israel’s supporters seemed excessively
argumentative, politically motivated, even conspiratorial. (Shahaf had
also investigated the assassination of Yitzhak Rabin.)

Shahaf was an easy target. Even those who agree with him and learn
from him find him difficult, and he’s definitely believes that what we
are told is not what happened to Rabin. But the “excessively
argumentative” nature of the problem was in part because of the “et alors” reflex that was so frustrating to those who made the arguments.
But the “politically motivated” is the more telling remark: this was
pervasive after Al Durah, especially in France, but really everywhere.
Any Jew/Israeli who defended Israel had to be doing it because they were partisan. In France, accusations of communautarisme where so common that a number of people who were not Jewish, when they defended Israel to their co-citoyens, got the response: “Oh I didn’t know you were Jewish.” This atmosphere, in which, in the words of Shmuel Trigano, “a Jew cannot bear witness,” explains in part why it took so long for the French to even see, much less admit the growing wave of anti-Semitism, and why the phenomenon of alter-juifs – Jews who had had great success while hiding their Jewish identity, suddenly saying, “as a Jew, I must denounce Israel’s terrible deeds.”
If one defends oneself it must be from self-interest (i.e.,
right-wing politics). Automatically suspect. If one admits to one’s
fault, one is noble. Of course no one, surprisingly not the French who
pride themselves on their méfiance (skepticism/mistrust), wondered about the politics and self-serving communautarisme of the Arab Muslim community who was insisting on the truth of their lethal narratives. Highway to the auto-stupefaction of rekaB Street, and the reason that roosters on Global Warming are owls on Global Jihad, and vice-versa.
In one case (right-wingers on Jihad) it’s opposing others, in the
other, (left-wingers on Warming), it’s about criticizing ourselves.

Yet from the start, there were many unanswered questions. The footage wasn’t continuous and key moments — such as when the boy ostensibly is struck — aren’t shown.

Don’t forget the lack of ambulance evacuation scenes of either the father or the boy. Given how many scenes of ambulance evacuation were staged that day, how could a dozen cameraman – and especially Talal Abu Rahma – have missed filming a real, heartbreaking one?

There was also the case of the Israeli doctor who
was cleared of defamation charges by a French court last year: He had
been sued by Muhammad’s father, Jamal, for claiming that scars on
Jamal’s body, allegedly caused by Israeli bullets, were caused many
years before the incident.
Over time, with every new investigative report — there have been too
many for me to keep track — and every new detail disclosed, my
uneasiness has grown. Although I very much wanted to believe that Israel
wasn’t at fault, I couldn’t overcome my suspicion about the attempts to
clear its name. On the other hand, the original narrative had too many
holes to ignore.

Fascinating. Rossner says he wants to believe Israel is innocent, but
the very fact that he might be motivated by that (apparently
illegitimate) desire kept him from allowing himself to look at the
powerful evidence that this terrible story about his own people was not
true. Normally one is worried that partisan motives might make one
ignore evidence, but in this case – and here we approach
hyper-self-criticism – it that noble concern makes on ignore the
evidence. Freud’s Moses and Monotheism has this quality to it, as Yosef Yerushalmi pointed out. It’s an one of the major “discontents” of assimilation according to Barry Rubin’s brilliant book.

And now the Israeli government’s new report claims the
broadcast was “edited and narrated” in a misleading way. The voice-over
says, for example, that “Jamal and his son Muhammad are the target of
fire coming from the Israeli position” and then that “Muhammad is dead
and his father badly hurt.” But according to the government report, “in
the final scenes the boy is not dead.” In the last seconds of the
footage, the “boy raises his arm” and “turns his head.”

And, according to the government report (and anyone else who’s examined the evidence), Enderlin had no, repeat no
evidence to corroborate his cameraman’s claims about this coming from
the Israeli position. (Indeed not once in any of the footage that Talal
shot of the Israeli position before and during this sequence is there
any sign of fire from there.)
Asked whether he might not have been hasty about this by Adi Schwartz for Haaretz, November 1, 2007, Enderlin responded: “what would they say in Gaza if I didn’t report that the Israelis killed him?” (The quote is absent in the English version of the article.)
And of course, while “the child does not die on camera” is the more
radical statement about the footage reconsidered, the most fundamental
part of the story as a lethal narrative, is the huge opening that Enderlin gave the demonizers by saying “target of fire coming from the Israeli position.”

Not that this solves the puzzle exactly, especially since
the report’s authors didn’t interview Jamal or French TV executives,
and they didn’t exhume Muhammad’s body for examination.

I agree the committee should have tried to interview Enderlin, Jamal
and Talal (and anyone else present at Netzarim that day). I don’t think
they would have come, not even Enderlin. But it’s not too late for an
honest international inquiry. My guess is Enderlin knows his goose is
cooked and will do anything to hamstring that initiative. It wouldn’t be
the first time.

And yet my thinking has changed. I started out believing
the dominant version of events largely because I was made skeptical by
Israel’s attempts to save its skin;

Now there’s a double-bind, schizophrenigenic approach – the very fact
that you are defending yourself leads me to reject your arguments.

now, I accept the possibility that the Israeli government’s take might be correct after all.

An intellectual! Someone capable of being convinced by empirical evidence.

This evolution brings me relief: I want to be able to
trust what my government says. But that carries its own problem: what
about my own motivations? Have I really been swayed by the new evidence,
or am I finally giving in to a deep desire of letting Israel off the
hook?

The only way to know is to explore further. The Al Durah evidence is only the beginning. The impact of this Icon of Hatred played in the dynamics of globalization – both the energizing of an apocalyptic death cult in the Muslim world
and the paralysis of an ability to defend ourselves on the part of
progressive forces in the West – and the school of lethal journalism
(and lethal NGOism) that it
empowered, still hold hegemony today among the major players in the
Western public sphere. When the whole picture is considered, just as
with the campaign of Jihadi suicide bombing, it inspired, the Al Durah
icon of hatred ultimately hurt Muslims far more than Israel, its
ostensible target.
I tweeted the Al Durah forgery has hurt the Arab world more than any
other society, by injecting them with a death cult, acknowledging
that fake can awaken from arab nightmare to a visitor from Egypt. His
response:

Indeed, I believe so too. I chatted with people from Gaza and the West Bank. They are sick of the status quo and want peace.

Emad el Dafrawi is
just the kind of person we’d like to believe is among the “vast
majority” of really moderate and humane Muslims and who is
(accordingly?) in grave danger.
Al Durah’s the red pill. And tackling it is the road out of rekaB
Street and on to recovery: Want to wake up and figure out what’s going
on? Take it.

Caroline Glick & Mark Levin: The Israeli Solution -- A One-State Pla

Why Israel Opposes International Forces in the Jordan Valley

U.S. scholars' group votes in favor of academic boycott of Israel

Yet another indication of the absolute corruption of American academia today. "US scholars' group votes in favor of academic boycott of Israel," from the Jerusalem Post, December 16: NEW YORK – The 5,000-member American Studies Association (ASA), which describes itself as “the nation’s oldest and largest association devoted to...http://www.jihadwatch.org/2013/12/us-scholars-group-votes-in-favor-of-academic-boycott-of-israel.html

Israel Living Prophecy

A senior New Israel Fund officer told a U.S. official in 2010 that the disappearance of the Jewish state would not be a tragedy, according to a document that was leaked by Wikileaks...She commented that she believed that in 100 years Israel would be majority Arab and that the disappearance of a Jewish state would not be the tragedy that Israelis fear since it would become more democratic.

Mideast expert Michael Widlanski: Fatah is a joke

US-Israeli talks focus on Ahmadinejad's possible ouster

How to exploit the deep cracks forming in Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's administration for removing the Iranian president was a top item on the agenda of the high-level talks between Barack Obama's advisers and Israeli officials at Mossad headquarters in Herzliya, north of Tel Aviv, Wednesday, July 29.

DEBKAfile's Iranian sources report that Ahmadinejad's cabinet is falling apart; of his original lineup of 21 ministers, only nine remain at their posts.

The Identity Of The Land

Why the Palestinians need to recognize the Jewish State

We do NOT support a 2-state solution

A January 2009 poll found that Americans oppose creating a Palestinian state by 45-31 percent. A February 2009 Maagar Mohot Survey Institute poll has also shown that Israelis oppose creating a Palestinian state by 51-32 percent.

Many other polls tell a similar story.

These figures suggest that Americans and Israelis have understood that creating a Palestinian state under current conditions will not bring peace but merely another terror state.

Netanya,Israel

Jerusalem At Night

Why reconstruct Gaza without making demands

- that Shalit be release without convicted terrorists being released by Israel in exchange,

- that the US be put in charge of the southern border to ensure that Hamas isn’t rearmed?

- that their three preconditions be accepted by Hamas, i.e. agree to all former agreements,recognize Israel and renounce terror

- that Hamas amend their Charter

- That Hamas disconnect from Iran

The answer is that they don’t want to.

Children of Hamas

Picture of Hamas children the media does not show you

IDF: Civilian Deaths in Gaza Less than 25% of Total

A maximum of 25% of the Palestinians killed in Gaza since the beginning of the Israeli operation are innocent civilians, the head of the IDF's Gaza Coordination and Liaison Administration (CLA), Col. Moshe Levi, said Wednesday. According to Palestinian medical officials, Israel has killed some 1,000 Palestinians and more than half of them are civilians. Levi said the CLA had compiled a list with the names of 900 Palestinians killed during the fighting. He said that 150 names were of women, children and elderly, and that the maximum number of civilians killed so far was 250. Levi also dismissed claims that 43 Palestinians were killed in an IDF attack on a Hamas terror cell that was firing mortars at Israeli forces from within an UNRWA school in Jabalya. Levi said 21 Palestinians were killed in the attack, including a number of Hamas operatives. (Jerusalem Post)

Hamas teaching the children of Gaza

An Iranian reformist daily newspaper has criticized Hamas "for risking lives of civilians, amongst them children, by hiding its forces in nurseries and hospitals." This is reported in today's Palestinian daily Al-Ayyam. The Palestinian daily adds that in response the Iranian government has closed the newspaper.

"The Iranian news agency "Irna" reported yesterday, that the Iranian Culture Ministry has closed the reformist daily newspaper "Karjo Zaran", because it published a report that included criticism of the Islamic Resistance Movement (Hamas). On December 30 the paper published a statement of a reformist student organization, that has criticized Hamas for risking lives of civilians, amongst them children, by hiding its forces in nurseries and hospitals. The statement was published whilst the Iranian government expresses a unified stands against Israel, and Tehran is overwhelmed by demonstrations against Israel."

[Al-Ayyam, Jan. 1, 2009] Thanks PMW

There was an error in this gadget

Iran-backed Hamas Rocket, Mortar Attacks and Nuclear Developments

9,400+ rockets and mortars fired from Gaza since 2003. [1]3,200+ rockets and mortars fired from Gaza in 2008 alone. [2]6,500+ rockets and mortars fired from Gaza since Israel withdrew from Gaza in 2005. [3]543+ rockets and mortars fired from Gaza into Israeli territory during the ceasefire from June 19 to Dec. 19, 2008. [4]28 deaths caused by rockets and mortars fired from Gaza into Israel since 2001. The dead include Israelis, Palestinians and foreign workers. Since the ceasefire ended, Iran-backed Palestinian groups in Gaza fired rockets and mortars that killed an Israeli-Arab construction worker and a mother of four who was seeking shelter in a bus station as a rocket warning siren sounded. [5]1,000+ people in Israel injured from rockets and mortars fired from Gaza since 2001, including Israelis, Palestinians and foreign workers. Since the ceasefire, 44 Israelis have been injured and 200 have been treated for shock. [6]Thanks Israel Project

It began with this...

The British Foreign Office, November 2nd, 1917Dear Lord Rothschild,I have much pleasure in conveying to you, on behalf of His Majesty’s Government, the following declaration of sympathy with Jewish Zionist aspirations which has been submitted to, and approved by, the Cabinet.

“His Majesty’s Government view with favour the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, and will use their best endeavours to facilitate theachievement of this object, it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities inPalestine, or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country.”I should be grateful if you would bring this declaration to the knowledge of the Zionist Federation.2

Signed,Arthur James Balfour[Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs]

Favorite Books

While Europe Slept

About Me

Semi-retired Professor, now also permanent resident of Israel;divides time between both countries-serves on several Boards of Directors for Israel advocacy groups;Chana, resident of Jerusalem, JCPA member

Syria is an Occupier-Are You Listening World?

As of this minute, Syria occupies at least 177 square miles of Lebanese soil. That you are now reading about it for the first time is as much a scandal as the occupation itself.

The news comes by way of a fact-finding survey of the Lebanese-Syrian border just produced by the International Lebanese Committee for UN Security Council Resolution 1559, an American NGO that has consultative status with the UN. In meticulous detail - supplemented by photographs and satellite images - the authors describe precisely where and how Lebanon has been infiltrated.

Though the land grabs are small affairs individually, they collectively add up to an area amounting to about 4% of Lebanese soil - in U.S. terms, the proportional equivalent of Arizona. Of particular note is that the area of Syrian conquest dwarves that of the Israeli-occupied Shebaa Farms which amount to an area of about 12 square miles.

It would be nice to see the Arab world protest this case of illegal occupation, given its passions about the subject.

Information worth Possessing

"Israel gave the Palestinians an autonomy in 42% of the West Bank and Gaza after the Oslo accords in the early 90's. Over 92% of Palestinians living in the West Bank and Gaza were then under the administration of the Palestinian Authority and its Chairman Yasser Arafat.

"Israel is surrounded by 10 hostile Arab countries who do not even recognize its right to exist ( Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Saudi Arabia, Yemen, Algeria, Lybia, Morocco, Tunisia, Aden) and Iran"